top | item 46037944 (no title) jaffathecake | 3 months ago Fwiw, JPEG XL takes around 2.5x the time to decode as an equivalent AVIF, and has worse compression https://jakearchibald.com/2025/present-and-future-of-progres... discuss order hn newest eviks|3 months ago Interesting, looks like another opportunity for Chrome to avoid the Safari mistake> slow. There's some suggestion that the Apple implementation is running on a single core, so maybe there's room for improvement.Though their own old attempt was even worse> of the old behind-a-flag Chromium JPEG XL decoder, and it's over 500% slower (6x) to decode than AVIF.
eviks|3 months ago Interesting, looks like another opportunity for Chrome to avoid the Safari mistake> slow. There's some suggestion that the Apple implementation is running on a single core, so maybe there's room for improvement.Though their own old attempt was even worse> of the old behind-a-flag Chromium JPEG XL decoder, and it's over 500% slower (6x) to decode than AVIF.
eviks|3 months ago
> slow. There's some suggestion that the Apple implementation is running on a single core, so maybe there's room for improvement.
Though their own old attempt was even worse
> of the old behind-a-flag Chromium JPEG XL decoder, and it's over 500% slower (6x) to decode than AVIF.